IDPA: SSR Power Floor finally reduced

Here is an eloquent post from the Brian Enos forums making a case against lowering the SSR power factor.

BTW, It's author is one of the inaugeral "Distinguished Masters" in IDPA SSR.

Bones said:
Early in the last century, the US Army's Standard Service Round, the 38 Long Colt, was dropped because it was widely determined to be ineffective during a campaign in the Philippines.

The US Army's standard side arm at the time was a double action Colt revolver (Model 1892 with a 6" barrel) that launched a 158 grain (or 150 grain depending on who's data you believe) 38 caliber lead RN heeled bullet at 763 fps. That equates to 114450 - 120554 PF. It was more powerful, however, than the 38 Short Colt, which generated significantly less power because of the 130 gr RN bullet it launched at the same muzzle velocity (760 fps). That equates to about 100,000 PF.

Meanwhile, in response to the documented ineffectiveness of the 38 Long Colt combination, S&W introduced the 38 S&W Special cartridge and Military and Police Revolver in 1902. This combination increased the chamber pressure and resulting velocity of a new 158 grain RN bullet by about 10% (equating to 125,895 - 132945 PF). Accounting for velocity losses in barrel lengths, that would bring us to 120800 fps out of a 4" (vs a 5 1/2" or 6") revolver. These data do not take into account propellant advances (i.e. much higher energy densities) in the last century. The 1902 vintage 38 S&W Special cartridge was originally developed for use with black powder propellant.

We have come nearly full circle in 109 years.

What would George Santayana say?

Craig
Click to expand...


http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=120677&st=150
 
IDPA is supposed to be about using "Full Power" service ammuition.

The new power factor reflects that which was found to be inadequate 'in the real world' 109 years ago.

That inadequacy resulted in the development of the .38 Special cartidge with a power factor that was in the neighbourhood of the old SSR power floor.

In my experience, those that were the loudest advocates for lowering the PF were mostly MM/SS level shooters. Their argument being that it was difficult to find factory ammo that made PF (despite the fact that they mostly reloaded themselves and were capable of producing ammo at 125000 PF). Whereas those shooters at the EX/MA (and now DM) class were quite comfortable with keeping it where it was. I'd be willing to wager that the lowering will not significantly increase SSR participation in IDPA.
 
Aqualung said:
IDPA is supposed to be about using "Full Power" service ammuition.

The new power factor reflects that which was found to be inadequate 'in the real world' 109 years ago.

That inadequacy resulted in the development of the .38 Special cartidge with a power factor that was in the neighbourhood of the old SSR power floor.

In my experience, those that were the loudest advocates for lowering the PF were mostly MM/SS level shooters. Their argument being that it was difficult to find factory ammo that made PF (despite the fact that they mostly reloaded themselves and were capable of producing ammo at 125000 PF). Whereas those shooters at the EX/MA (and now DM) class were quite comfortable with keeping it where it was. I'd be willing to wager that the lowering will not significantly increase SSR participation in IDPA.
Click to expand...

I don't think that anything will significantly increase this, there are a core group of revolver shooters, and that is the way it will be, it will never get to be as popular as shooting a auto pistol, really a non issue, just go and have fun.
 
Aqualung said:
IDPA is supposed to be about using "Full Power" service ammuition.

The new power factor reflects that which was found to be inadequate 'in the real world' 109 years ago.

That inadequacy resulted in the development of the .38 Special cartidge with a power factor that was in the neighbourhood of the old SSR power floor.

In my experience, those that were the loudest advocates for lowering the PF were mostly MM/SS level shooters. Their argument being that it was difficult to find factory ammo that made PF (despite the fact that they mostly reloaded themselves and were capable of producing ammo at 125000 PF). Whereas those shooters at the EX/MA (and now DM) class were quite comfortable with keeping it where it was. I'd be willing to wager that the lowering will not significantly increase SSR participation in IDPA.
Click to expand...

The reason for lowering the PF to 105 was due to the virtually all factory .38spl ammunition failed to meet the former PF of 125. In fact, despite what has been written about the US Army trials etc, a 125 PF put the loading above standard SAMMI specifications for the cartridge. To make the old PF you were shooting at +P pressure levels.

We wanted our shooters, many of whom do not reload, to be able to participate with ammo they could buy off the shelf. Tests were undertaken during the summer/fall by HQ on all available ammunition in the US. All but failed to make PF of 125. The lowest was 95! With a PF of 105 virtually all factory ammunition now meets this level. I assume from your statement you want IDPA ammo to be "Full Power" service ammuition". Well if by that you mean factory ammunition then you now have it. If I remember correctly the Edmonton City Police used 158 gr Lead round nose factory loadings as did the RCMP when they had their revolvers and none as I recall were +P loadings.

Will it increase participation in SSR Division? Maybe, maybe not. However those shooting SSR will be able to buy factory ammunition off the shelf and shoot our events.

I am not sure you are correct regardig who was pushing for the review. HQ ws concerned for sometime and the Area Coordinators asked HQ at the 2009/10 Meeting for the issue to be addressed.

I do know that most of our shooters across all our divisions numerically shoot at the Marksman/Sharpshooter Classifications so it would not surprise me to hear you conclude what you do.

Take Care

Bob
PS
The old .39 Long Colt US Army load was with a 148gr RN lead bullet over 14.4 gr of FFFg while the .38spl loading used the 158 gr RN Lead bullet over 20.6 gr of FFFg. If I can get hold of some FFFg I'll load some up and see what the loading will produce PF wise. Maybe I can convince JimS to use the loading when he comes to our Provincials next year.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom